March 05, 2009

In response to Bill O’Brien’s letter (3/1,”KC must crack down on begging”) concerning Kansas City’s homeless population, I would like to say that we are all in this together.

As I read the letter to my family at the breakfast table, our jaws got closer to the floor with every talking-point stereotype put forth. I kept waiting for him to offer a solution that would help get people off the streets. Harassing the homeless with laws is so 20th century.

Mr. O’Brien may want to consider volunteering to work with the people he so easily dismisses. Once he got to know them, maybe he would be a little more connected to the world around him.

Barry BernsteinOverland Park

My husband, who frequently travels through the Plaza, keeps a collection of $5 restaurant gift cards in his glove compartment. It is a win-win. The homeless person gets a good meal, and the business where the card was purchased makes some money.

Many of the homeless are mentally ill. It’s not a lifestyle most of them would have chosen. A little compassion would go a long way.

January 09, 2009

Sister Berta Sailer (1/4, Opinion, “As I See It: You can help KC’s poor children”) is truly a voice for the voiceless. I have known and worked with Sister Berta for many years. She is tenacious and dogged about speaking out for her children and their families.

Yes, Kansas City, there is extreme poverty in our community, and it affects many of our children. Get involved and see the impact of poverty on our children. This economic downturn will touch all of our lives, but it will ravage our poor children and their families. You can make a difference!

May God continue to bless Sister Berta, her staff, all associated with Operation Breakthrough and the many people in our community who work on behalf of the poor. They are good for the children.

James M. CaccamoDirector, Department of early learning, Mid-America Regional CouncilKansas City

November 24, 2008

As President-elect Obama generously takes on the overwhelming responsibilities that await him, there are a couple of fundamental changes in perspective that need to be kept in mind.

Our country needs to learn to act not merely for economic benefit but to encourage people’s natural inclination toward justice. We must reward the love, generosity, compassion, imagination, and wonder that would protect the beauty of the planet Earth and all life that abounds here.

We must also realize that terrorism is not stopped by wars, walls or interrogation under torture. Terrorism is stopped by education and by building relationships of trust that even out the playing field for everyone.

A way of demonstrating generosity is the proposed Global Marshall Plan, which would devote 1 to 2 percent of the gross product of each developed nation over 20 years to help 2 billion of the world’s people move out of poverty through aid and investments specifically directed toward them.

This proposal was introduced in the House of Representatives as H. Res. 1078, and more information is available from the Network of Spiritual Progressives.

The United States should take the lead in initiating the building of a just and compassionate world order.

November 12, 2008

Any time in history that you have no middle class, you have the haves and have-nots. It’s just like having a 24-foot ladder with eight feet of rungs missing from the middle. There is no way to work your way to the American dream at the top.

The Republicans would have you believe the trickle-down theory will get you there.

Without a middle class, the have-nots will be cleaning houses, cutting grass, cleaning windows and cooking for the haves. Although these are all honorable occupations, you would never be paid enough to ever think of opening your own small business.

Anyone who doesn’t believe this, just ask yourself why unions had to be formed. They were formed so the have-nots could make a living wage, have decent working conditions and save for that dream.

To break up the unions and get rid of the middle class is the haves’ goal.

November 08, 2008

To all the recent letter writers complaining about the criticism of Barack Obama’s comments on “spreading the wealth:” You are not facing reality.

It is a straw man argument that seems to know the personal beliefs of those who are opposed to this kind of thinking: that we do not believe in taxes, we are not compassionate, we are rich, we approve of the recent bailout or we do not personally support the underprivileged.

Socialism is an economic system, but it is also a belief that we should have a society where power and wealth are distributed evenly by the government. Socialist governments require taxes even more onerous than we have.

I want to be able to give to charities that I deem worthy of my hard-earned dollars. I do not want the government deciding at what income level I have earned too much.

If you are interested in a candidate’s compassion, you might compare the charitable giving records of Obama and Joe Biden with those of John McCain and Sarah Palin. Forget the amounts; just look at the percentages.

When Obama speaks of spreading the wealth, he evidently did not mean his wealth, only yours.

November 01, 2008

Enough about Joe the Plumber! I haven’t heard either candidate discuss what they plan to do about Susie the Welfare Recipient. Able-bodied but illiterate Susie, who has never worked a day in her life and has no intention of starting, is the role model for her five uneducated kids.

Barack Obama said he would help welfare recipients willing to work. What about the others?

People who get up and go to work every day resent funding Susie’s lifestyle, and politicians underestimate our anger. Many of us would like to know what the next president has in mind to remedy the situation.

Anne JohannesenKansas City

Americans already spread wealth

It is important to note that Paul Newman made a personal choice to direct profits from the sales of his food products to charities (10/25, Opinion, “U.S. excerpts: Newman’s example of giving”). The government did not mandate that he do this, as it might, through regulation or taxation, to redistribute wealth. Many businesses and individuals make similar choices as a part of their personal or business plans.

Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks’ book Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth about Compassionate Conservatism points out that Americans give more than the citizens of any other country. We also volunteer more.

Despite high gas and food prices and falling home values, Americans gave away a record $306 billion last year — an increase of $11 billion from the previous record year (2006).

We don’t need Obama’s plan to have the government redistribute wealth. Like Paul Newman, we do it pretty well on our own.

October 29, 2008

Years ago, when my company and my children were in their infancy, I was in line at the local grocery buying some beans and rice. The woman in front of me had steaks, chops and cheese — luxuries for us at that time. She promptly whipped out $80 in food stamps and then purchased two cartons of cigarettes with the $40 in cash from another pocket.

As I drove away in my rusty $200 truck, noting the scars and scabs on my hands, I made the decision that this was not fair.

Sixteen years later, as I write this, there are two scabs on my hands from working last week. The only difference is that I now drive a new truck and live a fairly comfortable life.

I wonder if after the election I will need to have bleeding fingers daily to maintain my standard of living for both myself and that woman.

Dan YatesBonner Springs

Helping weak strengthens all

Recent letter writers on the topic of socialism obviously have not listened to a single thing Barack Obama has preached about.

Obama’s main message has always been about personal responsibility. He thinks the best way for the poorest of Americans to improve their lives starts with the parents. He wants parents to take responsibility for raising their kids properly. He preaches for parents to take a role in their kids’ educations.

Denying these people health care and other basic privileges the rest of us enjoy to survive is inhumane. Yes, Obama wants to take a small bit from the super wealthy to help make sure the poor can get their feet on the ground and help turn bad communities into good ones. I don’t see a problem with that.

Obama preaches that we should rebuild this country from the bottom up. A chain is as strong as its weakest link. If America can improve its weakest link, the poor and disenfranchised, then the whole country gets stronger.

Jon StoneFairway

Socialism: Another definition

I’m always amazed and amused by the way the word “socialism” gets slung around in a political campaign. Jim Lullie (10/27, Letters) correctly notes that when Republicans shout it, they are in trouble.

I’m reminded of a tongue-in-cheek definition I heard years ago: “When the government does something for me, that’s social progress. When it does something for you, that’s socialism.”

Will AdamsLiberty

Giving shouldn’t be mandated

I’m perplexed by a phrase in the Obama campaign, “spread the wealth,” as if it were new. Seems to me we’ve been doing that since the beginning of time, when the first caveman divided his fish with another, and nobody had to tell him to do it.

In our town, sharing the wealth would include those who provide food, clothing and shelter to those in need, out of their own pockets, and the many churches and civic programs that do the same. Many prosperous, well-known families in Kansas City generously share their wealth. On the world stage, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Oprah Winfrey are among those who share their tremendous wealth.

We call this benevolent service to our human family charity, which is also love, and on a grander scale, philanthropy. The giants in the field are called philanthropists, and God bless them. If we start mandating such activity by the government, one way or the other, do we not kill the human spirit of giving?

In this country, we have always operated on the saying that “to whom much is given, much is expected.” May it always be so without government intrusion.

M.P. MillerOverland Park

Government already intrudes

I keep reading how people are so afraid of our country becoming socialist. Many fear our government will not only be planning and controlling the economy, but also taking over our lives and freedoms.

Three years ago, there was the Terri Schiavo case where a husband, with approval from medical professionals, wanted to allow his wife to die. She had been in a vegetative state for 15 years. President Bush flew back to Washington from Crawford, Texas, to sign a document prohibiting the doctors from following through on the husband’s request.

This act is an example of government intrusion far more serious than any socialist government would be. It appears to me that socialism could be closer to Democracy than what we have now.

October 28, 2008

I would like to calm the fears that Barack Obama is a socialist. If Sen. Obama is elected president, even with higher taxes, the rich will remain very rich.

I would also like to defend myself as a single, low-income mother, going to school full-time in preparation to spend the next 35 to 40 years of my life teaching children. The notion that I am incompetent or unworthy because I’m in a group that requires assistance is highly insulting.

Using a progressive income tax for things such as helping people in poor circumstances is an investment in society as a whole, not a despicable act of theft.

If I can fill bags of food for the Raytown Emergency Assistance Program with an income below the federal poverty level, then those making more than $250,000 a year can afford to pay a bit more in taxes.

Katy BielskiRaytown

All must be willing to give

Call it welfare if you like, but Barack Obama’s plan to help the working poor make it in this Ronald Reagan, “trickle on, I’ve got mine” failed economic environment is a sound plan. Helping those who help themselves is not welfare. People who complain the loudest at helping low-income families say nothing about the billions annually in corporate welfare.

I am amazed at the “Country First” people who want more tax cuts and more loopholes for the richest 5 percent, all while states are going broke, infrastructure is crumbling and our children are being saddled with a debt we or they may never be able to pay.

True patriotic Americans must be willing to give just a little more to save this country. I plan to start by putting America first and voting for Barack Obama.

October 27, 2008

Barack Obama has called for more government programs, more government spending, tax refunds to the many people who pay no tax and redistribution of wealth.

What qualifications does he have to decide how I spend my money?

What qualifications does he have to decide how much of my hard-earned money I can keep and how much he can take and give to someone else?

This great country was founded by people from all over the world in the search of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Their hands weren’t out for a government to take care of them, or some president to tell them how much money that can earn and how to spend it.

Hardworking taxpayers, do you want the pursuit of happiness or the government to run your lives?

William F ThompsonExcelsior Springs

After reading recent letters, I have only one thing to say: Get a grip, folks!

To say that Barack Obama’s redistribution of wealth is socialism is to completely ignore the Bush-Cheney redistribution of wealth for the last eight years. They have redistributed it to the wealthy, their friends at Halliburton and their friends in the oil industry. They called it capitalism.

Do you honestly think if Obama were a socialist he would be endorsed by the likes of Warren Buffet? The problem isn’t that Obama is a socialist. The problem is that John McCain and Sarah Palin have used the only weapon they have: fear. They have nothing else to offer, and, hey, it worked in the last election.

As McCain himself said, “you do not have to be scared” of an Obama presidency. Nothing Obama does could be even half as bad as what’s been done for the past eight years.

This right-wing hysteria is nothing more than ignorance.

Chris BovosOverland Park

Am I beginning too late, or too early, to request that 20 good citizens each donate 5 percent of their earnings to me?

I want to quit my job and be supported by those who are eager to continue working because they want to help spread the wealth.

Stephanie HamilLeawood

If we all raise our children like Barack Obama wants to lead our nation, more of our children would never leave home and will be dependent on their parents for the rest of their lives. How sad.

October 25, 2008

We know that Sen. Obama wants to “spread the wealth around.” I wonder if those he takes from will have any input as to who would receive the wealth?

Ed “Gomer” MoodyKansas City

Let Obama’s rich pals pony up

I have a great idea. Since Barack Obama is all about redistribution of wealth, he can definitely start with his celebrity friends, such as Oprah Winfrey. Let’s take all of her income above $250,000 (if she and the rest of them aren’t hiding it from the government). There should be lots to pass around. Maybe we can help some people out.

Then we can go to the other celebs, who like to talk like they are “Joe the Plumber” types, and go down the line from there. After we tally up all of their money, we can then start on the millions of dollars wasted during Obama’s two-year campaign to the White House.